Latest Posts › Appeals

Share:

SCOTUS Rejects FCC Edicts: Courts are (Finally) Free to Interpret the TCPA

In a highly anticipated decision with broad implications for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) litigants, on June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v....more

VPPA In Flux: Circuits Split on Who Counts as a VPPA “Consumer”

The question of who qualifies as a “consumer” under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) is no longer academic. In late March and early April 2025, two federal appellate courts issued starkly conflicting rulings in Gardner...more

Ninth Circuit Upholds Mass Arbitration Consolidation

The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Jones v. Starz Entertainment, LLC marks a significant development in the continued rapid evolution of mass arbitration. ...more

Eleventh Circuit Axes FCC’s One-to-One Consent Rule, Citing Agency Overstep

On January 24, 2025, only 48 hours before the Federal Communications Commission’s (“FCC”) FCC 23-107 Order was set to go into effect, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Insurance Marketing...more

Second Circuit Explodes Scope of VPPA with New Ruling in Salazar

The Second Circuit’s decision in Salazar v. NBA, No. 23-1147 (2d Cir. Oct. 15, 2024) creates significant risk for companies that offer videos for viewing on their websites and significantly expands potential liability under...more

Bay Area Credit Defeats FDCPA Claim: Fifth Circuit Affirms Covered “Communications” Must Convey Information Regarding a Debt

The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Fontana v. Bay Area Credit Services, No. 20-30471 (5th Cir. 2021) sets another important limitation on the scope of covered “communications” under the FDCPA. In this case, Bay Area Credit...more

Set Back For “Set Up” Claims: Court Holds Serial-Plaintiff Lacks Standing to Pursue TCPA Claim

Serial-litigant Mark Leyse was handed a well-deserved defeat after a decade long crusade against Bank of America (“BOA”) for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). Leyse v. Bank of Am., N.A.,...more

TCPA Fax Class Action Doomed: Fax Number on Business Card Constitutes Consent

Since the enactment of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), the FCC has long held that persons who knowingly and voluntarily release their telephone numbers have provided prior express consent to be called. But...more

Duran Duran: Second Circuit Complicates TCPA Litigation

The dust was finally settling. District and Circuit courts around the country were rejecting the Ninth Circuit’s overly broad interpretation of the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) under the...more

Seventh Circuit Deals Another Critical Blow to TCPA Litigation

Following the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion a few weeks ago, the Seventh Circuit just held that dialing equipment must be capable of storing or producing telephone numbers using a random or sequential number generator in order...more

Defense Victory: Eleventh Circuit Demolishes Expansive TCPA Interpretation - Holds an ATDS Must Randomly or Sequentially Generate...

On January 28, 2020, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a body-blow to serial TCPA scammers and everyone else who has disingenuously argued over the past decade that any type of “automated” dialing equipment is...more

TCPA Compliance Curveball: First Circuit Holds That Landline Phone May Be Treated As A Cell Phone For TCPA Purposes

In doing so, the First Circuit both expanded the scope of TCPA liability while simultaneously making compliance virtually impossible for callers. Cellular services and VOIP - The ATDS prohibition of the TCPA regulates...more

Let It Snow! Two Courts on the Same Day Hold That Random/Sequential Number Generation Required Under the TCPA

In Snow v. GE, No. 5:18-CV-511-FL, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99760 (E.D.N.C. June 14, 2019), a North Carolina federal court dismissed a TCPA claim on the grounds that dialing equipment must possess a random or sequential number...more

Mental Distress for Airline Lawyers - The Sixth Circuit's Decision in Doe v. Etihad

In Doe v. Etihad Airways, P.J.S.C., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit radically altered the scope of an air carrier’s liability under the Montreal Convention, the international treaty controlling an air...more

Sixth Circuit Expands Air Carrier Liability Under the Montreal Convention: How Should Air Carriers Respond?

In Doe v. Etihad Airways, No. 16-1042 (6th Cir. Aug. 30, 2017), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit radically altered the scope of an air carrier’s liability under the Montreal Convention, the...more

Rejected Offer Of Judgment Does Not Moot Plaintiff’s Claim, Fifth Circuit Holds

On August 12, 2015, the Fifth Circuit held that a plaintiff’s rejection of an offer of judgment does not moot the plaintiff’s claim, even if the offer provides complete relief to the plaintiff. Hooks v. Landmark Indus.,...more

Seventh Circuit Overrules Damasco: Holds That Offer Of Judgment Does Not Moot Individual Or Class Claims

On August 6, 2015, in Chapman v. First Index, Inc., Nos. 14-2773 & 14-2774 (7th Cir. Aug. 6, 2015), the Seventh Circuit reversed course and overruled its prior holding in Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662 F.3d 891 (7th Cir....more

A Prior Putative Class Action Does Not Toll The Statute of Limitations For Subsequent Class Actions, Eleventh Circuit Affirms

In Ewing Indus. Corp. v. Bob Wines Nursery, No. 14-13842, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13484 (11th Cir. Aug. 3, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the pendency of a prior purported class action does not toll the...more

Netflix Defeats Video Privacy Class Action

In Mollett, et al. v. Netflix, Inc., No. 12-17045 (9th Cir. July 31, 2015), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action filed against Netflix, Inc. for alleged violations of...more

Dismissal Of Securities Fraud Class Action Against Yahoo! Affirmed By Ninth Circuit

On May 15, 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a putative securities fraud class action against Yahoo! In re: Yahoo! Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 11-cv-02732 (9th Cir. May 15, 2015). In 2011,...more

Denial of Class Certification In Computer Spyware Suit Vacated By Third Circuit

On April 16, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated a district court’s order denying class certification of a computer spyware suit against Aaron’s Inc., concluding that district court had...more

Eighth Circuit Reverses Class Certification of FDCPA Suit Against Debt Collector And Its In-House Attorneys

In Powers v. Credit Mgmt. Servs., Inc., No. 13-2831 (8th Cir. Jan. 13, 2015), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the District of Nebraska’s order granting class certification of an action...more

Eighth Circuit Sets Standard For Cy Pres Distributions

On January 8, 2015, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals established a five-factor test governing cy pres distributions in class action lawsuits. In Re: BankAmerica Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 13-2620 (8th Cir. Jan. 8, 2015). ...more

Eleventh Circuit Joins Circuit Split On Whether Offers of Judgment May Moot Individual Or Class Claims

On December 1, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals joined the growing nationwide split between Circuits over whether an unaccepted offer of judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 68 may moot an individual plaintiff’s claim...more

Ohio’s Sixth District Reverses Order Granting Class Certification

In Gordon v. Erie Islands Resort & Marina, 6th Dist. No. OT-13-040, 2014-Ohio-4970, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth District of Ohio reversed an order granting class certification on the grounds that the trial court failed...more

26 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide